#No idea if i should be putting the second image under “read more” for censorship | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

mermaidylluria · 6 years

Photo

Warning to all you mers on Tumblr out there: The purge has officially begun. My account just got flagged, and the only things I have on here are my own event photos (which are all family-friendly & fully clothed), and mermaid art (both classical and new, some of which has an LGBTQ focus- and may, at times, *gasp* in some cases feature kissing). So.. just as a heads-up, the whole Tumblog censorship hubub is a real thing. My hope was that in a page FULL of mermaids, it would be obvious what the space was about- that it was absent of pornographic or ANY kind of child-endangering content, n’ be subsequently left alone. But it appears that’s not the case. So now that we know mer art is going to be targeted (after all, “NEKKIT BEWBIES, ER MAH GURD!!”), I suggest we all get ready to either defend our posts (via disputing flagged content), participate in some kind of (peaceful, preferably meaningful & artful) protest, or just leave the platform all together. 'Cause this tells me that they're not only flagging classical art, they're also trying to eradicate LGBTQ content, and NONE of that is okay. Personally, I’m going to do all 3. Fight and dispute, while making preparations to move my space elsewhere. Where that’ll be I’m not sure yet, but if we loose, I want a place for my mermaid stuff to go, and the demigods at Tumblr better be aware, I’m taking my decently-well-known bellydance n’ other blogs w/me too, if I’m forced to leave.

And just for my personal 2 cents on the matter? Dear gods, not ALL of the internet has to be child friendly. XP Censorship like that happening on YouTube, Facebook & now Tumblr stifles creativity (look at channels like Glam&Gore, who can’t barely do SFX makeup anymore because she keeps getting demonetized), silences valuable artistic and minority voices, removes audiences for burgeoning creators (who, btw, may NOT be engaging in pornographic content in ANY way), and forces narrow-minded, puritanical standards of "decency" (which are by FAR the minority), over others' ability to operate successfully in that medium. This smothers decent, AWESOME things like art, science, expression and SO much more. XS See, it’s not about the p0rn. It’s about the CENSORSHIP. This is the internet. It was designed to dispense and SHARE information, ideas, inspiration, fun, etc. Not be a surrogate nanny for your kids. XS

ANNNNYWAY, if you want to read more about what is and is not allowed on Tumblr now, you can visit: https://tumblr.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/231885248. (And be sure to read to the bottom, where users can find out how to appeal post & entire blog flags under the last 2 questions.) And if you have a mermaid blog where ANY kind of toplessness is involved, note that "female presenting nipples" is distinctly mentioned, which, as I'm sure lots of you already know, directly impacts classical AND modern art- one of the few things on Tumblr that can be shared WITHOUT a copyright, as well as a TON of mermaid art, classical and otherwise. XP

What does this mean? Well.. in simple terms, it means that stuff like Botticelli and Picasso are no longer welcome on Tumblr. It means that Reubens, Waterhouse and Rodin, if they have artistic interpretations of naked women in their work, cannot be shared on Tumblr. Even though their works are featured in international museums of the highest callibur, lauded all over the world as legends of innovation, vision, unparalleled beauty, & precision, expression & creativity, and world-famed for their social and economic value. Those.. are not welcome here now, apparently. Meanwhile, images & videos stolen from present-day & other modern hard-working artists, photographers, cartoonists, writers and other creators from allll over the world arrre hunky-dory. XP DaFUQ, Tumblr??? (At -least- they mention mis-attribution & non-attribution on their new guidelines now. That at least, is an improvement. X*)

But now.. let’s see how that’s directly affected my blog, shall we..? ‘Cause, as I mentioned before, I figured surely since I didn’t actually have any pr0n on my pages, I & other mer pages should be safe, right? BZZZZZZZT, WRONG. After getting this e-mail (pictured above), I went through my whole blog and found the 4 posts that were "flagged" as having adult content. *rolls eyes*

3 of them were reblogs &1 was an original post.

2 of those posts were queer-positive modern art.

1 was a photographic collection of pieces FEATURED IN "W" MAGAZINE,

And the last is a piece of classical style, queer-positive art. XS

One of the modern pieces doesn't even show nipples, just saggy bewbies COVERED with small seashells.

The other modern-style piece was a Rackham style drawing, where the tatas are but a mere suggestion of simple lines and dots.

One was shown in a INTERNATIONAL FRICKING FASHION MAGAZINE SPREAD, which was apparently suitable for SOMEONES' interpretation of public consumption,

and the last only shows suggestions & curvatures of breasts! (Showing the side and outer portions of the female chest, with no nipples. XP)

-And WHY AM I HAVING TO JUSTIFY THIS???? THIS IS ART. THIS IS NOT P0RN. Again I say "WTF, Tumblr????" XS

As you can see, 3 of my posts were reblogs, so I had no means of disputing those posts. (According to their new guidelines, the owner of the original post has to do that, and if they are found as having “inappropriate content,” there’s no further means of appeal.) But one of them, one of the very first posts I ever made in this blog, was an original, so I was able to refute its being deemed as inappropriate. FIrst, you have to go through allll of your posts to find.. whatever it is someone’s had issue with. (Whether it’s a person who’s flagged it or something chosen by Tumblr’s algorithms/keyword alert systems, I have no idea.) But they don't even bother to link you in your notification e-mail, so first you’ve gotta FIND what’s being flagged before you can repeal it. (I didn’t even know what I was looking for at first. They never specify. Would it be a tiny new icon near the Edit and Share buttons at the bottom? A wee little flag pointer, outside of the post itself..? Do I got to my posted page n’ try to find it? Or will it be in my Posts stream, & the whole post be red..? Who knows?) But eventually, after enough scrolling, I found what I was looking for. A big red bar across the affected posts. -And if it’s a post you can do something about, they give you a button to push on the designated "flagged" work, at the top right. After you hit the "dispute" button, you’re given a largely blank page. In the center, you get to choose between Dispute, Cancel or Learn More. No “tell us why you feel this should not be flagged, why it doesn’t violate our rules,” nothing. Nowhere to speak your peace. You just hit a button, and you’re done. You get no say, other than “I object, your honor!” NOT COOL, people. NOT COOL. You clearly don’t wanna hear the voices of your content creators, or, at least, enough to allow them to speak for the work they felt appropriate enough to post..

Reading this from another media source? Please don’t discount this issue if you don’t personally have a Tumblog. It doesn't really matter whether you use tumble or not, whether you think it's lame or not, etc. The problem is much, much larger than that, and it’s growing. This is another very large, social media platform that's being affected by censorship in the name of marketing- and thus, be child-friendly. They want the whole family to be able to come and see all the ads they wanna put here, and without that, they don’t make their money. So anything not child-friendly, even vaguely PERCEIVED as not child-friendly (by God only knows whose standards), is being wiped out from the whole platform. Don’t believe me? It’s happened on YouTube, on Facebook, and likely, many others. Do some googling and check it out for yourself. YouTube is a platform that’s being strangled by this phenomenon right this very second. There are videos on it. Go see. Now. ‘Cause if we don’t educate ourselves about this n’ do something to fight it, what’s happening to YouTube is our future. Not just here on Tumblr, but EVERYWHERE.

Big Brother isn't just watching, guys, he's stealing your open arenas for personal and creative expression, so he can better market to you & yer kids. He wants EVERYONE to buy his Stuff. And if the kids can’t see it here, they won’t ask mommy and daddy to go get it for them. So out classical art, and LGBTQ content, and mermaids go. Out the door. (Meanwhile, who do kids love?? UM.. MERMAIDS. HELLO!!! What should be educating them about history and the arts? UMM.. FINE ART, HELLO. Who teaches them about tolerance and diversity and SO MUCH MORE? Umm.. THE LGBTQ community! Who teaches them about what human bodies look like, and that it’s okay to have ANY kind of body? UM.. BODY POSITIVE ART, THANK YOU.)

We need to put the kaibosh on this somehow, now. Not just for Tumblr, or Facebook, or YouTube. We've got to find SOME way of letting the Big Boys know this is not activity we will tolerate. 'Cause the places to freely express ourselves are going to continue to diminish, get scarcer, and fewer.. until they're all.. gone.

ART =/= PORN, YOU IGNORANT, PURITANICAL, MONEY-GRUBBING FISHTITS. LEARN TO POLICE YOUR OWN CHILDREN, MORE EFFECTIVELY POLICE GENUINE CRIMINALS, AND LEAVE THE REST OF THE INTERNET ALONE. Please.

♥

5 notes · View notes

womenofcolor15 · 4 years

Text

French Cinema Organization Defends ‘Cuties’ Director During Backlash As Viewers Slam The Movie For ‘Sexualizing Children’

Netflix and filmmaker Maïmouna Doucouré have come under fire for the controversial coming-of-age film, Cuties. Now, UniFrance – a French cinema organization – is defending Maïmouna and her drama. More inside…

When the Cuties poster was first released, it was met with TONS of criticism. Mainly, people were outraged at how the poster sexualized young girls, which resulted in a trending #CancelNetflix hashtag.

The film is a coming-of-age story about an 11-year-old named Amy navigating life in modern society.

The synopsis reads:

Eleven-year-old Amy, her mother Mariam, and her younger siblings have newly relocated to a home in an impoverished suburb of Paris, awaiting Amy’s father to rejoin the family from Senegal. But as Mariam becomes increasingly distracted by challenges within her marriage, Amy begins to feel the weight of family responsibilities. Eager to seek refuge from her life at home, she becomes fascinated with a free-spirited and rebellious group of girls at her school. Hoping for a taste of freedom and the chance to become popular, she convinces them to let her join their dance crew, which the girls have dubbed “Cuties”. But as they rehearse for a local dance contest, Amy finds herself increasingly torn between her traditional Muslim upbringing and the diverse cultures and attitudes of her new friends in her adopted city.

Here's what the Senegalese-French film director said about her directorial debut:

“The main character of Amy is my alter ego,” director Maïmouna Doucouré told Shadow & Act. “She's based on my story. Just like Amy, I had questions about my femininity because I was growing up in two cultures, my parents' Senegalese culture, and then the French culture. So I had all of these questions also about how to become a woman."

“All of the stories that you see in the film are based on the stories that [were] told [to] me and I realized that these girls were learning to construct themselves and their version of femininity based on what they saw in social media. I realized that these girls were growing up with a vision that was objectifying women and that they were growing up with this idea of a woman being an object and a woman's worth and value being based on the number of likes that they received."

However, everyone didn’t see it that way.

Below are a few controversial scenes from the movie, which we are posting strictly as the reference point for a proper discussion to take place, as opposed to second hand descriptions:

youtube

Are we sure that Jeffrey Epstein didn’t direct this movie? #cutiesnetflix pic.twitter.com/Nc9kVT6E6V

— Lolly Holes (@LollyHoles) September 11, 2020

And here are the outraged reactions:

#Netflix aka #Pedoflix has lost over $9 billion in market value since the #CancelNetflix hashtag went viral over the show "Cuties" which depicts young girls, age 11 being sexualized among other things. Good. #SaveOurChildren pic.twitter.com/5ASFhjPcWC

— Alex Poucher (@alexpoucher) September 13, 2020

Cancelled my membership due to the movie “Cuties”. I will not support pedophilia #cancelnetflix pic.twitter.com/py9MrAxjEj

— Griff (@griff8864) September 14, 2020

#CancelNetflix It is everyone’s responsibility to safeguard children and protect their innocence. So the Netflix censorship board all sat down and agreed that this was okay??! Pathetic!! pic.twitter.com/05s7Z7GHo4

— Tsitsi (@exceptional_tsi) September 14, 2020

There's two posters for cuties. Netflix used the worst one imaginable and described the movie horribly. pic.twitter.com/rIek28Zxff

— lyle abner (@lyleabner) September 10, 2020

Director Maïmouna Doucouré won a Directing Award for Cuties when the film debuted at Sundance in January. Months later, she found herself in the middle a online sh*tstorm of controversy after the release of the film’s poster. She said

The outrage got out of control where folks began to send to her death threats.

“I received numerous attacks on my character from people who had not seen the film, who thought I was actually making a film that was apologetic about hypersexualiation of children,” she told Deadline in her first interview since the incident. “I also received numerous death threats.”

“We had several discussions back and forth after this happened,” she continued. “Netflix apologized publicly, and also personally to me,” she shared.

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos called her up to apologize. Some right wingers have also used this debate to further their unfounded Qanon theories that people like Oprah, Ellen, the Obamas and Susan Rice (the latter two who became directly affiliated with Netflix AFTER this film was made) are on a mission to promote sex trafficking in everyone's faces. They believe Trump is the designated person who will protect chldren from child predators. Yes, the man who is accused of visiting Pedophile Island with Jeffrey Epstein and accused by almost 100 women of sexual assault.

Again, the conspiracy theories hold no water and have no credibility, but in a climate where conspiracy theories are being passed off as fact and believed by those looking to simply believe in something simplistic, it's all quite dangerous rhetoric. Many believe Cuties is simply being used as a vehicle to futher push these conspiracy theories.

Although the backlash has been tremendous, Maïmouna said she has received “extraordinary support” from the French government, and that the film will be used as an educational tool in her home country.

Most recently, French cinema organization UniFrance, which is backed by the French government and represents hundreds of local producers, sales agents, directors and talent agents, sent out a memo to the industry to “offer its full support” to the director and its French producers.

In part, the organization wrote:

Cuties offers a subtle and sophisticated denunciation of the hyper-sexualization of a young generation who translate and reproduce the images that inundate them in their daily lives, particularly via social media. Whether we are spectators, parents, teenagers, producers, or distributors, this film invites us to reflect on the power of these images and the complexity of the constant dialogue between young people and the generation of their parents. This film appeals to our sense of discernment, be that on an individual or a collective level, and calls on us to assume our responsibilities.

Over the past several weeks, we have been closely following the exceptionally violent reaction to the film in the United States, during a presidential election campaign in full swing. In this context, UniFrance and all of its members wish to pledge their full support to Maïmouna Doucouré and to reaffirm their commitment to supporting the freedom of artistic creation and expression. This is because one of the great strengths of cinema is its capacity to reach beyond borders and boundaries, and to offer a critical and constructive viewpoint on the world and the excesses of today’s societies.

Furthermore, we consider that the call to boycott the film and to have it removed from the Netflix catalogue, in addition to the hate messages, insults, and unfounded speculations about the intent of the director and her producers, pose a serious threat to the very space that cinema seeks to open up: a space of discussion, reflection, and of helping us to see beyond our own preconceived ideas.

You can read the full message here.

Avengers: Endgame star Tessa Thompson also came to the film’s defense:

Disappointed to see how it was positioned in terms of marketing. I understand the response of everybody. But it doesn’t speak to the film I saw. https://t.co/L6kmAcJFU1

— Tessa Thompson (@TessaThompson_x) August 20, 2020

”#CUTIES is a beautiful film. It gutted me at @sundancefest. It introduces a fresh voice at the helm. She’s a French Senegalese Black woman mining her experiences. The film comments on the hyper-sexualization of preadolescent girls. Disappointed to see the current discourse,” she tweeted. “Disappointed to see how it was positioned in terms of marketing. I understand the response of everybody. But it doesn’t speak to the film I saw,” she continued.

Netflix didn’t make this film y’all.

— Tessa Thompson (@TessaThompson_x) August 20, 2020

Writer Caz Armstrong wrote an essay for In Their Own League, about Cuties and she said Netflix “betrayed” Maïmouna by originally marketing the film with a sexualized image of the young characters.

Original CUTIES movie poster, before Netflix tried to sexualize 11 year olds. pic.twitter.com/dHETTjS6FT

— Al Steel (@KnightofResist) September 12, 2020

“When Netflix’s marketing puts out a sexually provocative poster, they are deliberately leveraging the most controversial aspect of the film in an inappropriate way,” Armstrong writes. “They’re doing exactly what the film itself puts under the microscope, sexually exploiting girls without the mature discussion required. It’s clickbait.”

While we get what the director was trying to do with the coming-of-age film, there’s a fine line that’s should be balanced when it comes to displaying children in a sexual manner, even when it is attempting to prove a point about the problem of sexualizing children.

While we’re all aware of how children these days are being exposed to explicit content at an earlier age, one must be super mindful with storytelling in order to properly get the point across.

Photo: Netflix via AP

[Read More ...] source http://theybf.com/2020/09/18/french-cinema-organization-defends-%E2%80%98cuties%E2%80%99-director-after-backlash-as-viewers-slam-the-m

0 notes

hannecfm · 5 years

Text

Human - based investigation

First off, I thought about looking at of people interact with these businesses and their street art on social media since social media is a key component in the success of commercial street art. I wrote in my brief that I had to consider if this is ethical, as they don’t know that I am studying them. I looked at the guidelines for human based investigations, and it says that you should under no circumstances discuss what an individual has posted on their social media. This confirms my suspicion that it isn’t the most ethical thing to do. However, I have decided on making a survey where people can answer my questions in full anonymity. It will consist of multiple choice and short answer questions (depending on the question). I will add an option for the participants to add their own answers, and none of the questions will be compulsory – the participants can choose to avoid to answer a question if they are not comfortable with it. I will also show the answers and quote them directly, to not skew or give their answers a different tone or meaning.

As I wanted to explore some of my new questions after the first investigation, as well as try to answer some questions I didn’t answer fully in the first task, I started with re reading my brief and research-based investigation and taking some quick notes. After that I started making questions. Here are some of the ones I came up with:

The ones I ended up using in my survey were:

1. Have you ever posted pictures of street art on any of your social media accounts?

2. If so, have you ever posted any pictures of street art tied to businesses?

3. Have you ever gone to a location just to get a picture of street art?

4. Do you find a store or cafe more appealing when it has one or more elements of street art tied to its image? Example: Mural, decor, packaging

5. When around street art, how do you find the atmosphere?

6. Is the facade of a store, cafe or restaurant important to you when making decisions on where to go?

7. Street art often uses elements from commercial culture. This makes distinguishing commercial street art from normal street art difficult. Do you think advertising through street art is ethical?

8. Do you think there should be a limit when it comes to what businesses are allowed to put on their walls? Censorship

9. What do you think about art carrying commercial messages?

10. Do you find a store or cafe more Wellingtonian if it has elements of street art tied to it?

11. Do you think the growth of commercial street art has any positive or negative consequences? For the businesses, artists, citizens etc

12. Do you have any further comments or contributions?

Originally, I wanted to send my survey to lecturers, specifically the ones that do spatial design. However, making the survey took way longer than I anticipated, and by the time I was finished it was already the weekend. In order to get as many replies as possible I decided to find some students around my hall that could take the survey. When I saw the first answers, I realised that it might be better to ask “normal” people that doesn’t sit on a lot of theory on the subject. I know this sounds completely wrong. But what I set out to do at the beginning was looking at how people interact with the murals and businesses. This I realised after seeing the responses to the question: “Street art often uses elements from commercial culture. This makes distinguishing commercial street art from normal street art difficult. Do you think advertising through street art is ethical?”. I did not expect the response I got for that question, and I think that if I asked this to a lecturer the response would be pretty different. However, the responses I got seemed to be more of what the “general public”, or at least people my age, think.

Form: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1fdt2PNT3xy0AxKRiGjHlg65Wi7gIiTJNLqKm04kASZM/edit

Let’s go through the responses and what I learned:

First question (multiple choice):

Two of the participants answered yes to the question about whether they have posted pictures of street art on any of their social media accounts, one states that they look at street art, and five said no. The person who said that they look at street art posts, added this answer themselves in the “Other…” section. Looking at it now, I think I should have asked the question on whether the participants views street art pictures, instead of on if they post them. How many people who views the pictures are more important than how many post them. I could better measure the reach of street art by asking the question in this way.

Second question (multiple choice):

No one said yes, three said not relevant, and five said no. As the one above, I think I would have gotten responses more “valuable” to my research if I had asked how many of the participants have seen pictures of street art tied to businesses on social media.

Question 3 (multiple choice):

Here, two participants answered yes, five no, and one person added their own answer stating that they have gone, but don’t always take photos. This is going to sound very ignorant, but I honestly did not think that people went to just view pictures of street art, without taking a picture, in this day and age. I should also have added this option, as it is equally important. The article I read from LA Times for my background research stated that people often come to a location to take a picture, and then often end up buying something, such as a cup of coffee, as they are already there. As long as the people come to the area, the business’s tactic is working.

Question 4 (multiple choice):

The answers to this question I found interesting. As many as six of the eight people that took the survey answered yes. This was more than I expected. It could also be because most of the participants study creative degrees. However, for me personally, I study a creative degree and I would have answered no.

Question 5 (checkboxes):

This was one of the questions I was the most curious about. This is one of my original questions from the proposal, which has been influenced by the research I did for my last investigation. I was especially curious to see if anyone felt a change in the feeling of safety around atmosphere, as this was a repeating thing when I read articles for the text-based investigation. However, only one person stated that they felt safer around street art, and none the opposite. “Inspiring” and “cool” was the most popular answers, with five votes each. “Vibrant” and “Comfortable” were also popular. All of these are things that businesses typically want their environment to be. This tells me that street art could be one way to try and achieve these atmospheres. One person also added their own, stating “It feels like the company is more down to earth and stylish”. This I found very interesting. After reading about my topic I have become a little more sceptical towards commercial street art, and see it more as a marketing tool than anything else. But so far it looks like it fulfils its purpose.’

Question 6 (multiple choice):

When reading the tool kit in the previous investigation, I realised that one of the reasons for why a business would want to paint a mural etc could be to brighten and make the façade more welcoming. Therefore, I asked the participants how important the façade is when choosing between businesses. None of the participants said no, which is interesting but not surprising. Four said a little, three said yes, and one said that a good street (art?) encourages them to go because the product might be good too.

Question 7 (short answer):

One of the biggest dilemmas when it comes to commercial street art, and street art in general, is whether it is ethical or not. This can be discussed for eternity, and would probably never have a set answer. As you can see, most of the participants answered yes (or yeah), and one person added their own stating “I like it cause it takes something that often is a sign of a dodgy area and gives it positive connotations and makes the environment more colourful and interesting”. These answered surprised me, I was expecting them to be less uniform and that some people would have an issue with it. Is the ethics of commercial street art as much as an issue as I have read in reality?

Question 8 (multiple choice):

For this question, none of the participants said no. Three said yes, three said maybe and two added their own answers. When I first saw it, I was a little surprised. I was scared that for both this, and the previous questions, the answers would be opinionated mostly in the opposite direction as most of the participants are creative arts students. But I might have stereotyped the creative arts student in my head. Overall, it seems like the participants thinks that there should be a limit to what businesses can put on their walls.

Question 9 (short answer):

This is where it gets interesting. Generally, the participants seem to like commercial street art, apart from a couple who doesn’t really care for it. One participant saw it as a good advertisement tool for expanding the target market, one prefers it to regular advertisements, and one thinks it is a good opportunity for artists. A couple of the participants are okay with it, as long as it is the creator intention and the art come first. I hadn’t really thought about the comparison to advertisements to much myself, and it is interesting to see this viewpoint.

Question 10 (multiple choice):

This was one of the questions I was the most exited to see the answers for. The idea of a business being more Wellingtonian hit me when I was conducting my research-based investigation. Six participants said yes, while two said no. This I found very interesting. I can’t say a 100% that this confirms my suspicion since I have only surveyed eight people. However, I would say it is an indication that it is somewhat correct.

Question 11 (short answer):

Here we have some split opinions. One participant stated that they see only positive consequences for everyone involved, whereas another one said that they think it would be positive for the business, but possibly negative for the artists. Further, a different participant stated that it is a great way for artists and businesses to connect, but that it could also mean that artist are forced to only do commercial art in the future. The rest found it to be mainly positive, or “nah”. The overall vibe seems to be that the participants think it is positive, but some worry for the artists behind the art.

Last question (short answer):

I added this section in case any of the participants had anything on their chest. Didn’t seem like most of them had. I think the “bullshit” comment stems from me telling that person to not write any bullshit.

0 notes